since ALEC wrote and pushed stand your ground laws, can they be sued for outcome?

[yurbud]

In particular, since the laws are having a disparate impact on black people being killed?

[jberryhill]

1. No

[yurbud]

3. could you be more specific?

[jberryhill]

6. Okay, specifically, no

This is one of those questions that is so far outside the bounds of "things one can maintain a suit for" it is almost hard to explain why.

Lobbying efforts by some group did not cause the death of Mr. Martin.

[KittyWampus]

2. I didn't know about this connection. It's important. So I want to check this thread and hope other

DU'ers can stop talking about Snowden and consider this aspect.

[lsewpershad]

4. Maybe the gov who signed

bill into law should be also sued... but seriously all those involved in the writing and voting for this bad law should be made to pay a price.....

[GeorgeGist]

5. No silly. That's the beauty of it.

Governments can't be sued.

[EC]

7. I wonder?

they aren't the government. So there is no protection for them I would think.

[ananda]

8. Acc. to this article, ALEC has backed down since the Martin shooting.

But the damage is done. People are all twisted up like pretzels over this case and don't know which racist end is up.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2013/07/15/202418599/stand-your-ground-laws-under-scrutiny-post-zimmerman-verdict

ALEC, facing a backlash last year from its corporate supporters, abandoned its nationwide efforts to push stand your ground laws and other non-economic policy legislation.

When asked Monday about ALEC's current position, Bill Meierling, senior director of public affairs at the organization, emailed us this response:

"The American Legislative Exchange Council does not support Stand Your Ground policies. The Council focuses solely on pro-growth, economic issues to increase opportunity for all Americans."

For now, all eyes remain on Florida, where stand your ground is still standing, but where we may get a glimpse of how such laws there, and nationally, hold up under intensifying scrutiny — legal and otherwise.